Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
Come to think of it, if anything in Cindy's past were part of Michelle's life history, I would bet my bottom dollar that we'd have heard about it by now. Over and over and over again. This is called "media bias," and it deserves to be spotlighted immediately.
The cloud of growing doom hanging over Republicans as they skulk the corridors of power in Washington, D.C. is becoming more and more visible as the 2008 elections stumble down the campaign trail. It may break in a cloudburst of Democratic landslides this November, which Republicans are beginning to fully realize. Because the bad news for the Republicans is coming so fast and furious, I (once again) pay homage to the late great Herb Caen, and offer them up to you in a return of the Three-Dot Thursday format. Without further ado...
Last Sunday on the political talk shows, I noticed an interesting thing. An electoral math scenario for the outcome of the election in the Electoral College is being floated by some pundits: what happens if we get a 269-269 tie? I've noticed it more from right-wing commentators than left, but I think its true appeal is to the political wonk of either stripe -- a "what if" game to make this already exciting election even more so.
But the real sweeping reform Nelson is introducing is a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College. We would elect presidents with a nationwide popular vote count, instead of by the arcane rules of the Electoral College. It would be replaced with: whoever gets the most votes wins. Period. Al Gore might be finishing up his second term right about now, if this had been in place in 2000.
The most striking thing about the 2008 campaign so far has been the mainstream media pundits being so wrong, so many times. Over and over again, all the talking heads and denizens of the Sunday political talk shows have largely agreed on things which were almost immediately proven false by events on the ground. Here (in very rough chronological order) are just a few of the nuggets of "conventional wisdom" served up as gospel truth by the chattering classes -- which all turned out to be laughable (full disclosure: I uttered a few of these myself, I admit) Feel free to add your own, if I've missed anything obvious.
"I would call my attorney general in and review every single executive order issued by George Bush and overturn those laws or executive decisions that I feel violate the constitution," said Obama.
I personally am of the opinion that more free speech is better than less. Which is why I like the concept of 527s, and why I support their right to speak. It's also interested to see who else is against 527s -- both political parties. Because before 527s were around, these "advocacy ads" came from the party machine, and were coordinated with the candidates. Meaning centralized control over the message. But I don't consider that a good thing at all -- I like the concept of free citizens being able to have their own voices heard in the political debate. Sure, it's messier (with a lot of mud being flung), but true freedom is always a little messy.
Yesterday, all 29 cargo ports on the West Coast were shut down, although it wasn't terrorism that did it. It was the longshoremen, in a one-day strike. Media coverage, beyond some local newspapers, was almost completely non-existent.
I must admit, I was kind of surprised at the ferocity of the response, myself. Because I actually expected exactly what happened during the first hour of the debate -- shallowness and insipid "gotcha" questions. This is, after all, the mainstream media we are talking about. Did anyone really think it was suddenly going to morph into PBS on debate night?
In any case, Charlie Gibson asked the question of both of them, and when neither gave a clear answer, pressed them on it. Because the debate was held in Philadelphia, "the Constitution" was some sort of weird thematic "hook" that ABC was pushing, and Gibson tried to use this in an elitist smartest-kid-in-the-class way. The only problem, he got his facts massively wrong. On two levels. The stupidity he displayed was of monumental proportions. Here is his question: